Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

This relates to extensions as well as alterations, if I am correct. There is a fairly significant Celtic-tiger era development in my constituency. The developer fell into financial difficulty after having completed only one third of the development and then got stuck in terms of inability to complete the development. The developer went into receivership and a receiver took over. The receiver was looking to seek extensions of permission. That is reasonable and I am not objecting to it. However, portions of the estate that had been built but not completed were causing considerable difficulties for residents at the time. I appreciate this is a different process but it gives me an opportunity to raise this issue. The Minister may have experience of it himself. When the application for the extension of the permission came in, there were concerns locally around whether the residents could raise the non-completion of the portion of their estate. Of course, they could not do so and it was essentially a rubber-stamping exercise. The Minister has provided a definition of non-material but, in the context of extensions, is there a way to provide for a set of criteria under this section to determine whether it is merely a pro forma approval of the extension or whether issues of importance that would not fit the definition of "material", which relates to the large environmental criteria, could be considered by the planning authority?